A model of replicating coupled oscillators generates naturally occurring cell networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When a founder cell and its progeny divide with incomplete cytokinesis, a network forms in which each intercellular bridge corresponds to a past mitotic event. Such networks are required for gamete production in many animals, and different species have evolved diverse final network topologies. Although mechanisms regulating network assembly have been identified in particular organisms, we lack a quantitative framework to understand network assembly and inter-species variability. Motivated by cell networks responsible for oocyte production in invertebrates, where the final topology is typically invariant within each species, we devised a mathematical model for generating cell networks, in which each node is an oscillator and, after a full cycle, the node produces a daughter to which it remains connected. These cell cycle oscillations are transient and coupled via diffusion over the edges of the network. By variation of three biologically motivated parameters, our model generates nearly all such networks currently reported across invertebrates. Furthermore, small parameter variations can rationalize cases of intra-species variation. Because cell networks outside of the ovary often form less deterministically, we propose model generalizations to account for sources of stochasticity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".